[License-review] [Non-DoD Source] Re: Submission of the Upstream Compatibility License v1.0 (UCL-1.0) for approval

[Richard Fontana]

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 02:11:02PM +0000, Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US) wrote:

> > > Right now, ARL's Open Source License is stalled internally while
> > > waiting for comments from higher ups; if NOSA 2.0 was
> > > Apache-compatible and OSI approved, we could drop the ARL OSL and go with 
> > > NOSA 2.0 instead.
> >
> > What do you mean by 'Apache-compatible'?
> 
> A license where code and other artifacts of a project that are licensed under 
> NOSA 2.0 could be legally imported into a project that is licensed under 
> Apache 2.0 (as defined at http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0), and 
> vice-versa.  We want our code to be useful to the Open Source community; 
> having a license that is OSI approved, but incompatible with other licenses 
> is, in my not so humble opinion, a bad idea.

I think it's safe to say that NOSA 2.0 is not Apache-compatible in
this sense.